Steps to reproduce:
- Open a PoS session on a small screen (mobile app or mobile browser)
- Register at least one order, so the order list is not empty
- Go to the Orders screen and type a term in the search bar

Issue:
On a desktop the search bar drops down the list of fields to search on (Reference, Receipt Number, Invoice Number, Date, Customer). On a small screen that list never shows up, so the search silently falls back to the first field and there is no way to search by Date or by Customer.

Cause:
The list is rendered, but painted behind the order list. Under the media-breakpoint-down(sm) block of ticket_screen.scss the order list becomes `position: sticky; z-index: 1`, so a sibling rule raised `.search .fields` to `z-index: 2` to keep the dropdown on top. The `z-1` utility class put on that dropdown in 07f743843830 compiles to `z-index: 1 !important` and overrides the rule. Both elements end up at `z-index: 1` in the same stacking context, and the order list wins the paint order because it comes later in the DOM.

Fix:
Drop the `z-1` utility and declare `z-index: 2` on `.fields` in the search bar's own stylesheet, which makes the small-screen override in ticket_screen.scss redundant. The stacking of the dropdown now lives in a single place, next to the rest of its styling, so a utility class added to that element cannot silently disable it again.

A tour clicks its target element directly and so cannot see a purely visual overlap, which is why the existing MobileTestUi runs of TicketScreen.search() never caught this. The added assertion checks that a suggestion is the topmost element at its own center.

opw-6540466

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#287534
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#286983

## Description

Changing an employee version's working schedule recomputes the internal dates of subsequent time off requests.

The `hr.leave` write override then mirrors these recomputed UTC values back to the request dates. For timezones ahead of UTC, midnight on a non-working day can therefore shift the requested date to the previous day.

This fix marks the schedule-triggered re-computation as an internal fast update, ensuring that the dates selected on the time off request remain the source of truth while still allowing the leave duration to be recomputed according to the new working schedule.

Regression coverage is added to ensure that changing an employee's working schedule:

* preserves the dates selected on existing time off requests;
* correctly recomputes the leave duration according to the new schedule.

## Steps to reproduce

1. Create an employee with timezone Europe/Brussels and a Monday–Friday working schedule. Before creating any leave, set the employment record’s effective date and contract start date to 3 March 2025.
2. Create a full-day time off request from 23 to 26 February 2026. Its duration is initially four working days.
3. Change only the employee’s working schedule to a duration-based Tuesday–Friday schedule, with 7.6 hours per working day and Monday off. Leave the effective date and contract dates unchanged, then save.

**Before the fix:** the request’s start date incorrectly shifts to 22 February.

**After the fix:** the dates remain 23–26 February, while the duration correctly decreases to three working days.

opw-6456107

Issue:
---
When a quotation header/footer PDF has a hierarchical AcroForm field,
the value set for that field is silently dropped from the generated PDF
Quote when running on pypdf 5.4.0.

Steps to reproduce:
1- Using a python 3.13 env, install requirements.txt (or otherwise
   run with pypdf==5.4.0 instead of PyPDF2).
2- Upload a header/footer PDF whose form field is a hierarchical field (`/T`/`/FT`/`/V` on the parent, not on the widget itself). The attachment from the ticket can be used as a sample to reproduce the bug.
3- Create a SO and select that document in the Quote Builder tab.
4- Print -> PDF Quote.
5- The value bound to that field does not appear in the printed PDF.

Cause:
---
After https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/4b02fbd717f62dd5345dad3ffb8d428c1c180007 `_add_pages_to_writer`
renames the parent `/Field` object's `/T` when the widget itself has
none. PyPDF2's `addPage` inserted the reader's page as is, keeping the
widget's `/Parent`. pypdf 5.4.0 deep clones the page instead and
ignores `/Parent` at every depth, so the widget loses the link to that
field. It ends up with neither `/T` nor `/FT`, hence nothing matches the
value mapping.

Fix:
---
Merge the field into its widget annotations instead: copy the prefixed
`/T` and the inheritable keys onto each of them, then drop `/Parent`.
The field's own `/T` is left untouched, so a field owning several
widgets is filled on all of them.

opw-6508728

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#287676
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#286186

Steps to reproduce:
- Create a gift card program (several programs sharing the same gift card product show the same issue)
- In the PoS, sell a physical gift card: click the gift card product and set a code through "Sell physical gift card?"
- Click the gift card product again to sell a second physical card of the same value
- Validate the order

Issue:
The second unit is merged into the already coded orderline (one line, qty 2, one code), so the "Sell physical gift card?" link is no longer displayed and the second code cannot be entered. Validating the order then fails with "The operation cannot be completed: A coupon/loyalty card must have a unique code." and the order stays unsynced: the qty 2 line is split into two point entries both carrying the same gift_code, so two loyalty.card records are created with the same code.

Cause:
_setupGiftCardOptions() (and setupEWalletOptions()) pass merge=false so that a gift card line is never merged, and until 17.0 add_product() honored it ("options.merge !== false"). The 18.0 store refactoring dropped it: addLineToOrder() decides merging from a local variable that is only set to false when a price_unit is given in vals, and never reads opts.merge. The option became dead code, in point_of_sale's addLineToOrder as well as for the pos_discount caller.

Fix:
Honor opts.merge === false in addLineToOrder(). Callers that do not pass the option are unaffected, so the default merging behaviour is byte-for-byte the same; only the callers explicitly forbidding a merge (gift card, ewallet and discount lines) get their pre-18.0 behaviour back.

opw-6466324

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#287486
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#286237

Steps to reproduce:
------------------------------------
1. Install Time off module
2. Create New Fully Flexible Employee
3. Click on the Time off smart button
4. Create time off for multiple days (eg. Mon - Friday)

Observation:
------------------------------------
Number of days still shows 1 Days.

Issue:
------------------------------------
Issue occurs because `work_time_per_day_mapped` returns one interval per day for
standard and flexible schedules in multi-day time off requests, so the interval
count correctly matches the number of leave days.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d73e5662a0af7c549008661f743ba5d51f765339/addons/hr_holidays/models/hr_leave.py#L460-L461

However, for fully flexible schedules, it returns a single interval
containing the total hours across all days, causing the leave duration to
always be computed as 1 day regardless of the actual number of days requested.

Solution:
------------------------------------
For fully flexible employees, count the actual calendar days and subtract public
holidays when applicable.

opw-6060552

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#255826

#### Issue

When manually adding component lines in the subcontracting Record Production flow, extra stock move lines can remain in the database without a linked stock move.

Those lines have no move_id, so their related state is empty. They can later be selected by stock reservation code and cause validation errors when processing the transfer.

#### Steps to reproduce

1. Create a subcontracted product.
2. Confirm a subcontracting receipt/purchase flow for that product.
3. Open the subcontracting Record Production popup.
4. Remove an existing component line.
5. Add a new component line for another storable product available at the subcontractor location.
6. Save/record the production.
7. Check stock.move.line records ,  Inventory > History > Group By Status.

An extra stock move line is left with no move_id.

#### Root cause

The inverse of `mrp.production.move_line_raw_ids` already collects and deletes move lines detached from existing raw moves.

However, when the user adds a new component product, the inverse creates a new additional raw move. Creating that raw move can also create reserved move lines. The inverse then replaces `move.move_line_ids` with the user-entered lines, but it did not collect the newly created reserved lines before replacing them.

Those reserved lines were detached from the move and left in the database as orphan stock move lines.

#### Fix

Apply the same cleanup logic to newly created additional raw moves: collect their auto-created move lines before replacing `move_line_ids`, then unlink those detached lines at the end of the inverse.

opw-6304649

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281864
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276235

Current behavior:
--
Registering a super payment from a pay run opened out of the Pay Runs kanban fails with "Wrong value for account.payment.state. The same super contribution registers without error when opened from Payroll > Reporting > Australia > Super Contributions.

Expected behavior:
--
Register Super Payment should work regardless of how the super contribution record was reached.

Steps to reproduce:
--
- Take an Australian pay run through to Paid
- Open Payroll > Payslips > Pay Runs, kanban grouped by Status (default)
- Open the pay run from the Paid column, then Super Submissions
- Lock the super contribution and click Register Super Payment

Cause of the issue:
--
The Pay Runs kanban is grouped by state, so the web client adds default_state to the context of records opened from a column. That context follows the smart button into action_register_super_payment, where account.payment is created without an explicit state. The ORM applies default_state from the context which is a
hr.payslip.run value that account.payment.state does not accept. The same leak reaches account.move through action_post, which creates the payment journal entry.

Fix:
--
apply with_context(clean_context(self.env.context)) to the recordset to remove the default_state key

opw-6478084

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#128724

When we save a sale order just after reordering its sale order lines, there's a chance that an error is thrown

Steps to reproduce:
1. Install Sales
2. Go to Sales and open any quotation that has multiple sale order lines
3. Reorder a sale order line and immediately save (there's more chance to reproduce if you have a lot of sol and if you use the shortcut `ALT + S`)
4. An error is thrown

Issue:
It is possible that the save takes place during the execution of super.sortDrop. This reassigns the id of all the records in this.props.list.records
Therefore, calling `_handleQuantityAdjustment` with the recordMap computed before the save uses an id that has disappeard from this.props.list.records so we cannot find it at
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4973903252865a6a7a2da235bc3a01675dbbff4d/addons/sale_management/static/src/fields/sale_order_line_field/sale_order_line_field.js#L263
which eventually throws an error

Solution:
Suspend any save mechanism when sortDrop starts and resume it when sortDrop has finished

opw-6483206

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#286787

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**

When a dynamic product carousel is set to single-image scrolling mode in an RTL language (e.g., Arabic), sliding between items behaves inconsistently, resulting in empty spots or temporarily distorted images.

This occurs because the DOM manipulation creating the infinite scroll was coded for LTR physical movements. In LTR, the first DOM element is visually on the left. In RTL, the visual layout is mirrored, with the first DOM element visually on the right. When we then trigger a "left" slide in RTL, the LTR-based JavaScript doesn't appropriately move the last element to the first index prior to the animation, resulting in an empty gap, among other issues.

This commit resolves the issue by checking the document's text direction. By swapping the target direction ("left" or "right") in onSlideSingleScroll and onSlidSingleScroll when RTL is active, the underlying array operations now correctly align with the animation.

**Steps to reproduce:**

- Website > Edit > add Product Carousel > Customize > change Scrolling Mode to Single
- Website > Edit > Theme > Website > Language > change to Arabic
- Click the arrows in the product carousel > observe inconsistent scrolling with visual glitches


**Current behavior before PR:**

- Visual glitches when sliding carousels in single-image scrolling mode for RTL languages

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

- No visual glitches when sliding carousels in single-image scrolling mode for RTL languages

opw-6490277

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#286042

An automation rule triggered when a field reaches a specific value can run its actions twice when a record is created without that field provided explicitly.

For example, a rule that sends one email and schedules two activities can send two emails and schedule four activities for one record.

### Reproduction Steps

Create an automation on `crm.lead` that triggers when the stage is set to "New", with one email action and one activity action. Create an opportunity through the website contact form, which leaves the stage unset.

The lead is assigned to the "New" stage, but both actions run twice.

### Cause

The lead stage is computed and read during creation. That computation can trigger the automation before the creation hook processes the same record, causing both paths to run the actions.

The processing code tracks records already handled during nested computations. The feedback flag used for this tracking is attached to the records, but the code checked the automation context instead. When the computation was triggered during creation, the flag was therefore missed.

### Fix

Read the feedback flag from the records so nested computations update the shared tracking state. The creation hook then skips records already processed by the computation.

opw-6331134

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#288222

### Issue:
When a bank account is manually set on a bill for a partner with multiple bank accounts, using the Auto-Complete feature could reset the manual selection even without a currency change

### Cause:
When `invoice_vendor_bill_id` is set, an onchange assigns `currency_id` unconditionally, even when it is the same value
This triggers `_compute_partner_bank_id`, which always recomputes the best matching bank account from scratch without considering the currently set value
If the currency did not change, this recompute is unnecessary and silently overrides the manual selection

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `account`
- Create a Vendor with 2 bank accounts (keep default values to have equal priority on all accounts)
- Create and post a Bill for this vendor with at least one line
- Create a new Bill for the same vendor
- Set the Recipient Bank to the second account in the list
- In Auto-Complete, select the first Bill
 
Before the fix, the Recipient Bank is reset to the first account

opw-6210414

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#283479

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

A file upload through `FileInput` (and therefore every `many2many_binary` field) still calls `onUpload` after the component has been destroyed. When the form or dialog holding the field goes away while the upload request is in flight, the response crashes the web client with two "Odoo Client Error" popups and the uploaded attachment is orphaned.

Steps to reproduce on a stock database (19.0, and 17.0 carries the same code):

1. Open an Email Template form (Settings > Technical > Email Templates), page *Options*, field *Attachments*. Any `target="new"` wizard with a `many2many_binary` field shows the same thing, e.g. the Recruitment *Refuse* wizard.
2. Pick a file that takes a moment to upload (a few MB, or a slow connection).
3. Before the file tile appears, leave the form through the breadcrumb, or close the wizard with Escape, its close button, or its action button. Nothing in the field shows that an upload is still running, so users do this routinely.

Current behavior before PR:

When the upload response arrives, two errors are raised:

```
UncaughtPromiseError > Component is destroyed
    at webRead <- _loadRecords <- _applyCommands <- addAndRemove
TypeError: Cannot set properties of null (setting 'value')
    at FileInput.onFileInputChange
```

Cause: `FileInput` posts the file through the `http` service, which is not protected against a destroyed component (unlike `orm`), so the response still reaches `onFileInputChange` after the component, the field and the form controller are gone. It then calls `onUpload`, which for `Many2ManyBinaryField` links the attachment through the form controller's protected ORM (hence the rejection), and it clears a file input ref that no longer exists (hence the TypeError).

We hit this in production on three different wizards over a few months. The client error logs users saved all carry the same trace, and the audit log shows the dialog's action completing a fraction of a second before the upload landed.

Desired behavior after PR is merged:

After the upload resolves, `onFileInputChange` stops when the component is destroyed: nobody is left to receive the uploaded files, and this matches how the protected services already treat a destroyed component. No error is raised, and `onUpload` is not called.

A Hoot test in `file_input.test.js` mounts a `FileInput` behind a `t-if`, starts an upload, unmounts the input while the upload is pending, resolves the upload, and asserts that `onUpload` was not called. It fails before the fix with the two errors above and passes after.

`master` already guards the ref write through its signal-style refs, but still calls `onUpload` on the destroyed component, so the first error remains there.

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#286831

Steps to reproduce:
--------------------------------------------
1. Install `sale_timesheet` module
2. Create a product with:
    * Type: Service
    * Invoicing Policy: Prepaid/Fixed Price
    * Create on Order: Project & Task
    * Upsell Threshold: Set some value (e,g. 600%)
3. Create and confirm the sale order with that product
4. Create and confirm an invoice for the sale order
5. From Recorder Hours Smart button:
    * Add two timesheets for hours 3 & 4 (Combined h > Threshold Percentage/100)

Observation:
--------------------------------------------
* When adding a single 7h timesheet, an upsell warning activity is correctly created for the salesperson in the chatter.
* When adding multiple incremental timesheets whose combined duration exceeds the threshold, no upsell warning activity is created.

Issue:
--------------------------------------------
* The `_compute_field_value` method filters on `invoice_status != 'upselling'` before recomputing the new invoice status.
* After the first incremental timesheet is added, the sales order already has the upselling status from the previous computation.
* As a result, subsequent computations skip the upsell activity logic, even though `has_displayed_warning_upsell` is still `False` and no warning activity has yet been created.

Solution:
--------------------------------------------
* Removes the `so.invoice_status != 'upselling'` condition from the filter.
* The order-level `invoice_status` was never the right place to control upsell activity creation. An order can have `invoice_status == 'upselling'` for various reasons (delivered > invoiced), but that doesn't mean all lines have already triggered their upsell warnings.

opw-6117754

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#287642
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266275